REGULATION AND CONTROL

CONTROL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND DESIGN BY THE ROOT LOCUS METHOD II

Goal for today’s lecture

 Introduction
 Design by Root Locus
 Lead compensation
 Lag compensation
 Lag-Lead compensation
 Parallel compensation
Introduction
 A feedback control system that provides an optimum performance without any necessary adjustment is

rare.

 In building a control system, we know that proper modification of the plant dynamics may be a simple

way to meet the performance specifications.

 This, however, may not be possible in many practical situations because the plant may be fixed and not

modifiable.

 Then we must adjust parameters other than those in the fixed plant.
 In previous lectures, we have discussed root locus method for loop gain adjustment.

 We have found that to achieve the desired system response, it is possible to adjust the system parameters
but it is often not enough.
 Cont’d
 It is then required to reconsider the structure of the system and redesign the system. The design
problems, therefore, become those of improving system performance by insertion of a compensator.
 Compensator: A compensator is an additional component or circuit that is inserted into a control
system to equalize or compensate for a deficient performance.
Necessities of compensation
 A system may be unsatisfactory in ：
 Stability.

 Speed of response.

 Steady-state error.

 Thus the design of a system is concerned with the alteration of the frequency response or the root locus
of the system in order to obtain a suitable system performance.
Design by Root Locus

 The design by the root-locus method is based on reshaping the root locus of the system by adding
poles and zeros to the system’s open-loop transfer function and forcing the root loci to pass through
desired closed loop poles in the s plane.
 The characteristic of the root locus design is its being based on the assumption that the closed loop
system has a pair of dominant closed-loop poles. This means that the effects of zeros and additional
poles do not affect the response characteristics very much.
 In the design by the root locus method, the root loci of the system are reshaped through the use of a
compensator so that a pair of dominant closed loop poles can be placed at the desired location.
 Cont’d
 The root-locus approach to design is very powerful when the specifications are given
in terms of time-domain quantities, such as
 damping ratio
 undamped natural frequency
 desired dominant closed-loop poles
 maximum overshoot
 rise time
 settling time.

 These performance specifications can be defined in terms of the desirable location of

the poles and zeros of the closed-loop.
 Root locus method can be used to find a suitable compensator Gc(s) so that the
Compensation configuration

 Compensation schemes commonly used for feedback control systems

are:

 Series Compensation

 Parallel Compensation
Commonly Used Compensators

 Among the many kinds of compensators, widely employed compensators are the
 lead compensators : the steady-state output has a phase lead, then the network is called a lead
network.
 lag compensators: If the steady-state output has a phase lag, then the network is called a lag
network.
 lag–lead compensators: both phase lag and phase lead occur in the output but in different frequency
regions. Phase lag occurs in the low-frequency region and phase lead occurs in the high-frequency
region.
Effect of Addition of Poles on Root Locus

 The addition of a pole to the open-loop transfer function has the effect of pulling the
root locus to the right, tending to lower the system’s relative stability and to slow
down the settling of the response.
 K K
G(S )  Add a Pole at -1 G(S ) 
S S ( S  1)

Root Locus Root Locus

0.06 0.998 0.996 0.993 0.986 0.965 0.86 0.5 0.86 0.76 0.64 0.5 0.34 0.16

0.999 0.4
0.94
0.04
0.3

0.2
0.02 1 0.985

0.1
Imag Axis

Imag Axis
1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2
0 1 0

-0.1
-0.02 1
0.985
-0.2

-0.04 -0.3
0.999 0.94
-0.4
-0.06 0.998 0.996 0.993 0.986 0.965 0.86
-0.5 0.86 0.76 0.64 0.5 0.34 0.16
-1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 -1 -0.9 -0.8 -0.7 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0
Real Axis Real Axis
 K
G(S ) 
S ( S  1)( S  2)

Root Locus

0.74 0.6 0.46 0.3 0.16

0.84
4

3
0.93
2

0.98
1
Imag Axis

6 5 4 3 2 1
0

-1
0.98

-2
0.93
-3

-4
0.84
0.74 0.6 0.46 0.3 0.16

-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
Real Axis
Effect of Addition of Zeros on Root Locus

 The addition of a pole to the open-loop transfer function has the effect of pulling the
root locus to the left, tending to increase the system’s relative stability and to speed up
the settling of the response.
 K K ( S  3)
G(S )  G(S ) 
S ( S  1) Add a zero at -3
S ( S  1)

Root Locus
0.8
0.84 0.72 0.58 0.44 0.3 0.14
Root Locus
0.6 2.5
0.96 0.92 0.85 0.74 0.56 0.3
0.92 2
0.982
0.4
1.5

0.98
Imaginary Axis

0.2 1
0.996

0.5
1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2

Imag Axis
0 8 6 4 2
0

-0.2 -0.5
0.98
0.996
-1
-0.4
-1.5
0.92
0.982
-0.6 -2

0.96 0.92 0.85 0.74 0.56 0.3

0.84 0.72 0.58 0.44 0.3 0.14 -2.5
-0.8 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
-1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 Real Axis

Real Axis
 K K ( S  3)
G(S )  Add a zero at -3 G(S ) 
S ( S  1)( S  2) S ( S  1)( S  2)

Root Locus

0.74 0.6 0.46 0.3 0.16 Root Locus

0.84
4 0.28 0.19 0.135 0.095 0.06 0.03 8
8
3 0.42
0.93 6
6
2
4
4
0.98
1 0.7
2
2
Imag Axis

Imag Axis
6 5 4 3 2 1
0
0
-1
0.98 -2
2
-2 0.7
-4
0.93 4
-3
-6
0.42 6
-4
0.84 -8
0.74 0.6 0.46 0.3 0.16 8
0.28 0.19 0.135 0.095 0.06 0.03
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0
Real Axis
Real Axis
Lead compensation
Lead Compensation

 Lead Compensation essentially yields an appreciable improvement in transient

response and a small change in steady state accuracy.

 There are many ways to realize lead compensators and lag compensators, such
as electronic networks using operational amplifiers, electrical RC networks,
and mechanical spring-dashpot systems.
 Cont’d

 Generally Lead compensators are represented by following transfer function

, ()

, ()

 Where α and T are determined from the angle deficiency.

 Kc is determined from the requirement of the open-loop gain.
Lead Compensation Techniques Based on the Root-Locus
Approach.

 The procedures for designing a lead compensator by the root-locus method

may be stated as follows:
1. Analyze the given system via root locus.
2. From the performance specifications, determine the desired location for the dominant closed-loop
poles.
3. From the root-locus plot of the uncompensated system (original system), ascertain whether or not
the gain adjustment alone can yield the desired closed loop poles.
 If not, calculate the angle deficiency . This angle must be contributed by the lead compensator if the new
root locus is to pass through the desired locations for the dominant closed-loop poles.
4. Assume the Lead Compensator (as shown above)
 Cont’d
5. If static error constants are not specified, determine the location of the pole and zero of
the lead compensator so that the lead compensator will contribute the necessary angle.
 If no other requirements are imposed on the system, try to make the value of α as large as possible. A larger
value of α generally results in a larger value of Kv, which is desirable.
6. Determine the value of Kc of the lead compensator from the magnitude condition.
7. Once a compensator has been designed, check to see whether all performance specifications have
been met.
 If the compensated system does not meet the performance specifications, then repeat the design procedure
by adjusting the compensator pole and zero until all such specifications are met.
 If the selected dominant closed-loop poles are not really dominant, or if the selected dominant closed-loop
poles do not yield the desired result, it will be necessary to modify the location of the pair of such selected
dominant closed-loop poles.
Example-1

 Consider the position control system shown in following figure.

 The closed loop transfer function of the given system is:

C ( s) 10
 2
R ( s ) s  s  10
Step-1

 The closed loop poles are

s  0.5  j 3.1225
 The damping ratio of the closed-loop poles is
0.158.
 The undamped natural frequency of the closed-
loop poles is 3.1623 rad/sec.
 It is desired to design an Electronic lead compensator
Gc(s) so that the dominant closed poles have the
damping ratio 0.5 and undamped natural frequency 3
rad/sec.
Step-2

 From the performance specifications, determine the desired location for the dominant closed-loop
poles.
 Desired performance Specifications are:
 It is desired to have damping ratio 0.5 and undamped natural frequency 3 rad/sec.

C ( s) n2 9
 2  2
R( s ) s  2 n s  n s  3s  9
2

s  1.5  j 2.5981
 Cont’d
• Alternatively desired location of
Desired
closed loop poles can also be Closed Loop
Pole
determined graphically
• Desired ωn= 3 rad/sec
60
• Desired damping ratio= 0.5
  cos1 
  cos 1 (0.5)  60
Step-3

Desired
 From the root-locus plot of the Closed Loop
Pole
uncompensated system ascertain whether
or not the gain adjustment alone can yield
the desired closed loop poles.
 If not, calculate the angle deficiency.
 Cont’d

 To calculate the angle of deficiency apply Angle Condition at desired closed loop pole.

Desired Closed Loop Pole

s  1.5  j 2.5981

 d  180  120  100.8 -2

-1
 d  40.89 100.8o 120o

-2 -1
 Cont’d
 Alternatively angle of deficiency can be calculated as.
10
 d  180  
s ( s  1) s  1.5 j 2.5981
Where s  1.5  j 2.5981 are desired closed loop poles

 d  180  10  s s  1.5 j 2.5981  ( s  1) s  1.5 j 2.5981

 d  180  120  100.8

 d  40.89
Step-4

 This angle must be contributed by the lead compensator if the new root locus is
to pass through the desired locations for the dominant closed-loop poles.

 Note that the solution to such a problem is not unique. There are infinitely
many solutions.
Step-5 (Solution-1)

 If we choose the zero of the lead

compensator at s = -1 so that it will
cancel the plant pole at s =-1, then the 40.89

compensator pole must be located at s =-

3.
 If static error constants are not specified,
determine the location of the pole and
zero of the lead compensator so that the
lead compensator will contribute the
necessary angle.
Step-5
 The pole and zero of compensator are
determined as
=

40.89
 The Value of can be determined as

1
=1 yields 𝑇 =1
𝑇 →

1
= 3 yields 𝛼= 0.333
𝛼𝑇 →
Step-6

 The Value of Kc can be determined using magnitude condition.

|𝐾𝑐
(𝑠 +1) 10
𝑠 +3 𝑠 (𝑠 +1) |
𝑠 =− 1.5+ 𝑗 2.5981
=1

|𝐾𝑐
10
𝑠( 𝑠 +3) |𝑠 =−1.5 + 𝑗 2.5981
=1

𝐾 𝑐= |
𝑠( 𝑠 +3)
10 |𝑠 =−1.5 + 𝑗 2.5981
=0.9
𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) =0.9
𝑠 +1
𝑠+ 3
Final Design Check

 The open loop transfer function of the designed system then becomes
9
𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺( 𝑠)=
𝑠 (𝑠 +3)
 The closed loop transfer function of compensated system becomes.

𝐶 ( 𝑠) 9
= 2
𝑅( 𝑠) 𝑠 +3 𝑠+ 9
 Cont’d
Root Locus
5 Root Locus
5

0.158 3.16
3
0.5
Imaginary Axis

Imaginary Axis
0
0

0.158 3.16 0.5

3

-5
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 -5
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
10
Real Axis
𝐺 (𝑠 )= Real Axis 9
𝑠 ( 𝑠+1) 𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺(𝑠)=
𝑠 (𝑠 +3)
 Cont’d

 The static velocity error constant for original system is obtained as

follows.
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠𝐺( 𝑠) 𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠
𝑠→ 0 𝑠→ 0 [ 10
]
𝑠( 𝑠+ 1)
=10

 The steady state error is then calculated as

1 1
𝑒 𝑠𝑠= = =0.1
𝐾 𝑣 10
 Cont’d
Step Response
1.4
Actual System
1.2 Compensated System

0.8
Amplitude

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
 Solution-1

Cont’d

 The static velocity error constant for the compensated system can be
calculated as
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺( 𝑠) 𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠
𝑠→ 0 𝑠→ 0 [ 9
]
𝑠( 𝑠+ 3)
=3

 The steady state error is then calculated as

1 1
𝑒 𝑠𝑠= = =0.333
𝐾𝑣 3
Step-5 (Solution-II)

-2

40.89
-1

90o
49.2 o

-3 -2 -1
 Cont’d

-2

40.89
-1

90o
49.2 o

-3 -2 -1

𝑠 +1.5
𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) =1.03
𝑠+ 3.6
Step-5 (Solution-III)
 If no other requirements are imposed on the system, try to make the value of α as large as
possible. A larger value of α generally results in a larger value of Kv, which is desirable.
 Procedure to obtain a largest possible value for α.
 First, draw a horizontal line passing through point P, the desired location for one of the dominant closed-loop poles. This is shown
as line PA in following figure.
 Draw also a line connecting point P and the origin O. P
A
-2

-1

O
-3 -2 -1
 Cont’d
 Bisect the angle between the lines PA and PO, as shown in following
figure.
P
A

 -2
2 
2 -1

O
-3 -2 -1
 Cont’d
 Draw two lines PC and PD that make angles with the the bisector PB.
 The intersections of PC and PD with the negative real axis give the
necessary locations for the pole and zero of the lead network.
P
A
-2

d
2
d -1
2

O
-3 -2 -1
C
B
D
 Cont’d

 The lead compensator has zero at s=–1.9432 and

pole at s=–4.6458.

 Thus, Gc(s) can be given as

=
 Cont’d

 For this compensator value of is

1
= 4.6458 yields 𝛼=0.418
𝛼𝑇 →

 Also1
=1.9432 yields 𝑇 =0.514
𝑇 →
Step-6 (Solution-III)

 Determine the value of Kc of the lead compensator from the magnitude

condition.
10 𝐾 𝑐 ( 𝑠+1.9432)
𝐺 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐻 ( 𝑠)=
𝑠( 𝑠+ 1)( 𝑠+ 4.6458)

| 10 𝐾 𝑐 ( 𝑠+1.9432)
𝑠( 𝑠+ 1)( 𝑠+ 4.6458) |
𝑠=−1.5 + 𝑗 2.5981
=1
 Cont’d

𝐾as𝑐 =1.2287
 The Kc is calculated

 Hence, the lead compensator Gc(s) just designed is given by

𝑠+1.9432
𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) =1.2287
𝑠+ 4.6458
Final Design Check

Desired Closed Desired

Loop Pole Closed Loop
Pole

Uncompensated Compensated
System System
 Cont’d

 It is worthwhile to check the static velocity error constant Kv for the

system just designed. 𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺( 𝑠)
𝑠→ 0

[
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 1.2287
𝑠→ 0
𝑠 +1.9432 10
𝑠+ 4.6458 𝑠( 𝑠+ 1)
=5.139
]
 Steady state error is
94
Comparison
Cont’d
Lag compensation
Lag Compensation
 Lag compensation is used to improve the steady state error of the system.

 Generally Lag compensators are represented by following transfer function

, ()

 Or , ()

 Where is gain of lag compensator.

Lag Compensation Techniques Based on the Root-Locus Approach.

 Consider the problem of finding a suitable compensation network for the case where
the system exhibits satisfactory transient-response characteristics but unsatisfactory
steady-state characteristics.

 Compensation in this case essentially consists of increasing the open loop gain
without appreciably changing the transient-response characteristics.

 This means that the root locus in the neighborhood of the dominant closed-loop poles
should not be changed appreciably, but the open-loop gain should be increased as
much as needed.
 Cont’d
 To avoid an appreciable change in the root loci, the angle contribution of the lag
network should be limited to a small amount, say less than 5°.

 To assure this, we place the pole and zero of the lag network relatively close together
and near the origin of the s plane.

 Then the closed-loop poles of the compensated system will be shifted only slightly
from their original locations. Hence, the transient-response characteristics will be
changed only slightly.
 Cont’d

 Consider a lag compensator Gc(s), where

, ()

 If we place the zero and pole of the lag compensator very close to each other, then at =
(where is one of the dominant closed loop poles) then the magnitudes and are almost
equal, or

| |
1
𝑠+
^ 𝑇
| 𝑐 1|
𝐺 ( 𝑠 ) = 𝐾 𝑐 ≅^𝐾𝑐
1
𝑠+
𝛽𝑇
 Cont’d

 To make the angle contribution of the lag portion of the compensator small, we

( )
require 1
𝑠+
° 𝑇 °
− 5 <𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 <0
1
𝑠+
𝛽𝑇

 This implies that if gain of the lag compensator is set equal to 1, the alteration in the
transient-response characteristics will be very small, despite the fact that the overall
gain of the open-loop transfer function is increased by a factor of , where >1.
 Cont’d
 If the pole and zero are placed very close to the origin, then the value of can be made
large.

 A large value of may be used, provided physical realization of the lag compensator
is possible.

 It is noted that the value of T must be large, but its exact value is not critical.

 However, it should not be too large in order to avoid difficulties in realizing the
phase-lag compensator by physical components.
 Cont’d
 An increase in the gain means an increase in the static error constants.

𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠𝐺( 𝑠)
𝑠→ 0

 If the open loop transfer function of the uncompensated system is G(s), then the static
velocity error constant Kv of the uncompensated system is
^
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺( 𝑠)=𝐾 𝑣 lim 𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 )
𝑠→ 0 𝑠→ 0

 Then for the compensated system with the open-loop transfer function Gc(s)G(s) the static
velocity error constant becomes 1
𝑠+
^ ^ 𝑇
𝐾 𝑣 =𝐾 𝑣 lim 𝐾 𝑐 =𝐾 𝑣 ^
𝐾𝑐 𝛽
𝑠 →0 1
𝑠+
𝛽𝑇
 Cont’d

 The main negative effect of the lag compensation is that the compensator zero that will
be generated near the origin creates a closed-loop pole near the origin.

 This closed loop pole and compensator zero will generate a long tail of small
amplitude in the step response, thus increasing the settling time.
Design Procedure

 We will assume that the uncompensated system meets the transient-response specifications by
simple gain adjustment.
 If this is not the case then we need to design a lag-lead compensator.
1. Draw the root-locus plot for the uncompensated system whose open-loop transfer function is
G(s).
 Based on the transient-response specifications, locate the dominant closed-loop poles on the root locus.
2. Assume the transfer function of the lag compensator (shown above)
 Then the open-loop transfer function of the compensated system becomes Gc(s)G(s).
3. Evaluate the particular static error constant specified in the problem.
 Determine the amount of increase in the static error constant necessary to satisfy the specifications.
 Cont’d
1. Determine the pole and zero of the lag compensator that produce the necessary increase in the particular
static error constant without appreciably altering the original root loci.
 The ratio of the value of gain required in the specifications and the gain found in the uncompensated
system is the required ratio between the distance of the zero from the origin and that of the pole from the
origin.
2. Draw a new root-locus plot for the compensated system.
 Locate the desired dominant closed-loop poles on the root locus.
 (If the angle contribution of the lag network is very small—that is, a few degrees—then the original and
new root loci are almost identical.
 Otherwise, there will be a slight discrepancy between them.
 Then locate, on the new root locus, the desired dominant closed-loop poles based on the transient-response
specifications.
3. Step 6 : Adjust gain of the compensator from the magnitude condition so that the dominant closed-loop
poles lie at the desired location.
Example-2
 Consider the system shown in following figure.

 The damping ratio of the dominant closed-loop poles is . The undamped natural frequency
of the dominant closed-loop poles is 0.673 rad/sec. The static velocity error constant is
0.53 sec–1.
 It is desired to increase the static velocity error constant Kv to about 5 sec–1 without
appreciably changing the location of the dominant closed-loop poles.
Step-1

 The dominant closed-loop poles

of given system are

s = -0.3307 ± j0.5864
Step-2

 According to given conditions we need to add following compensator to

fulfill the requirement.
=
Step-3
 The static velocity error constant of the plant () is

𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠𝐺( 𝑠)=lim 𝑠

𝑠→ 0 𝑠→ 0 [
1.06
𝑠 ( 𝑠 +1 ) ( 𝑠 +2 )
=0.53 𝑠
]
−1

^
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺( 𝑠)=𝐾 𝑣 lim 𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 )
𝑠→ 0 𝑠→ 0

 The desired static velocity error constant () of the compensated system is .

1
𝑠+
^ 𝑇
𝐾 𝑣 =𝐾 𝑣 lim ^𝐾𝑐 =𝐾 𝑣 ^𝐾𝑐 𝛽
𝑠 →0 1
𝑠+
𝛽𝑇
 Cont’d
1
𝑠+
^ 𝑇
𝐾 𝑣 =𝐾 𝑣 lim ^𝐾𝑐 =𝐾 𝑣 ^
𝐾𝑐 𝛽
𝑠 →0 1
𝑠+
𝛽𝑇

^
𝐾 𝑣 =𝐾 𝑣 ^
𝐾𝑐 𝛽

5=0.53 𝛽
𝛽=10
Step-4 (Solution 1)

 Place the pole and zero of the lag compensator

 Since , therefore

=
 Cont’d
 Place the zero and pole of the lag compensator at s=–0.05 and s=–0.005,
respectively.
=
 The transfer function of the lag compensator becomes

 Open loop transfer function is given as

=

𝑤h𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝐾 =1.06 ^
𝐾𝑐
Step-5

 Root locus of uncompensated and

compensated systems.

 New Closed Loop poles are

𝑠=−0.31 ± 𝑗 0.55
Step-6

 The open-loop gain K is determined from the magnitude condition.

| 𝐾 ( 𝑠+ 0.05)
𝑠( 𝑠+ 0.005)( 𝑠+1)( 𝑠+ 2) |
𝑠=−0.31 + 𝑗 0.55
=1

𝐾 =1.0235
^
𝐾 =1.06 𝐾 𝑐
 Then the compensator gain is determined as

^ 𝐾
𝐾 𝑐= =0.9656
1.06
 Cont’d

 Then the compensator transfer function is given as

𝑠 +0.05
𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) =0.9656
𝑠 +0.005
Final design check
 The compensated system has following open loop transfer function.

=
 Static velocity error constant is calculated as
^
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺( 𝑠)
𝑠→ 0

^ 1.0235 ( 𝑠+ 0.05 )
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 [ ]
𝑠→ 0 𝑠 ( 𝑠 +0.005 )( 𝑠+1 ) ( 𝑠+2 )

^ 1.0235 ( 0.05 )
𝐾 𝑣= =5.12 𝑠− 1
( 0.005 ) (1 )( 2 )
Step-4 (Solution 2)
 Place the zero and pole of the lag compensator at s=–0.01 and s=–0.001,
respectively.
=
 The transfer function of the lag compensator becomes

 Open loop transfer function is given as

=

𝑤h𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝐾 =1.06 ^
𝐾𝑐
Step-5 (Solution 2)
Root Locus
 Root locus of uncompensated and compensated 6
systems. Actual System
4 Compensated System

 New Closed Loop poles are 2

Imaginary Axis
0
𝑠=−0.33 ± 𝑗 0.55
-2

-4

-6
-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4
Real Axis
Lag – Lead Compensation
Introduction
 Lead compensation basically speeds up the response and increases the stability
of the system.
 Lag compensation improves the steady-state accuracy of the system, but
reduces the speed of the response.
 If improvements in both transient response and steady-state response are
desired, then both a lead compensator and a lag compensator may be used
simultaneously.
 Rather than introducing both a lead compensator and a lag compensator as
separate units, however, it is economical to use a single lag–lead compensator.
Lag-Lead Compensation

 Lag-Lead compensators are represented by following transfer function

, ()

 Where Kc belongs to lead portion of the compensator.

Lag-Lead Compensation Techniques Based on the Root-Locus
Approach.

 In designing lag–lead compensators, we consider two cases where

 Case-1:
, ()

 Case-2:
, ()
Design Procedure (Case-1)

1. From the given performance specifications, determine the desired location for
the dominant closed loop poles.
2. Using the uncompensated open loop transfer function, determine the angel
deficiency if the dominant closed loop poles are to be at the desired location.
The phase lead portion of the lag-lead compensator must contribute this angle.
3. Assuming that we later choose T2 sufficiently large so that the magnitude of the
lag portion is approximately unity, choose the values of T1 and from the
requirement. Then determine the value of Kc from the magnitude condition.
 Cont’d

4. Determine the value of to satisfy the requirement for Kv. The static error
constant Kv is given by:

5. Then, using the value of thus determined, choose the value of T2.
Design Procedure (Case-2)

1. From the given performance specifications, determine the desired location for the
dominant closed loop poles.
2. Using the modified lag lead compensator (shown above), if the static velocity error
constant Kv is specified, determine the value of constant Kc from .
3. To have the domiant closed loop poles at the desired location, calculate the
angle contribution needed from the phase lead portion of the lag-lead
compensator.
4. For the lag-lead compensator, we choose T2 sufficiently large so that is approximately
unity. Determine the values of T1 and from the magnitude angle condition.
5. Using the value of just determined, choose T2.
Example-3 (Case-1)
 Consider the control system shown in following figure

 The damping ratio is 0.125, the undamped natural frequency is 2 rad/sec, and the static velocity
error constant is 8 sec–1.
 It is desired to make the damping ratio of the dominant closed-loop poles equal to 0.5 and to
increase the undamped natural frequency to 5 rad/sec and the static velocity error constant to 80
sec–1.
 Design an appropriate compensator to meet all the performance specifications.
 Cont’d
 From the performance specifications, the dominant closed-loop poles must be at

𝑠=−2.50 ± 𝑗 4.33

 Since
4
  235
s ( s  0.5) s  2.50 j 4.33

 Therefore the phase-lead portion of the lag–lead compensator must contribute 55° so
that the root locus passes through the desired location of the dominant closed-loop
poles.
 Cont’d
 The phase-lead portion of the lag–lead compensator becomes

=
 Thus and .

 Next we determine the value of Kc from the magnitude condition:

|𝐾𝑐
(𝑠 +0.5) 4
|
𝑠+5.02 𝑠( 𝑠+ 0.5) 𝑠 =−2.5 + 𝑗 4 . 33
=1

𝐾 𝑐= |
𝑠( 𝑠 +5.02)
4 |
𝑠=− 2.5+ 𝑗 4 .33
=6 . 26
 Cont’d
 The phase-lag portion of the compensator can be designed as follows.
 First the value of is determined to satisfy the requirement on the static velocity
error constant ^
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺( 𝑠)
𝑠→ 0

[ ( )
]
1
25.04 𝑠 +
𝑇2
80= lim 𝑠
𝑠→ 0
(
𝑠 ( 𝑠 +5.02 ) 𝑠+
1
𝛽𝑇 2 )
80=4.988 𝛽
𝛽=16.04
 Cont’d

 Finally, we choose the value of such that the following two conditions are
satisfied:

 We may choose several values for T2, since T2=5 satisfies the two conditions
we may choose that.
 Cont’d

 Now the transfer function of the designed lag–lead compensator is given

by

𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) =6.26 (
𝑠+ 0.5
𝑠+ 5.02 )( 𝑠+ 0.2
𝑠+ 0.0127 )
Example-4 (Case-2)
 Consider the control system shown in following figure

 The damping ratio is 0.125, the undamped natural frequency is 2 rad/sec, and the static velocity
error constant is 8 sec–1.
 It is desired to make the damping ratio of the dominant closed-loop poles equal to 0.5 and to
increase the undamped natural frequency to 5 rad/sec and the static velocity error constant to 80
sec–1.
 Design an appropriate compensator to meet all the performance specifications.
 Cont’d
 From the performance specifications, the dominant closed-loop poles must be at

𝑠=−2.50 ± 𝑗 4.33
 The open loop transfer function of the compensated system is

( )( )
1 1
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝑇2 4
𝐺 𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺 ( 𝑠)= 𝐾 𝑐
𝛽 1 𝑠 (𝑠 +0.5)
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝛽 𝑇2

 Since the requirement on the static velocity error constant Kv is 80, we have

 Thus
 Cont’d

 The time constant T1 and the value of are determined from

Therefore T1=0.420 and =3.503. The phase lead portion of the network thus become 𝑠 ( 𝑠+ 2.38
𝑠+ 8.34 )
 Cont’d

 If we choose T2=10, then 1>magnitude>0.99, <angle<. Then =0.0285.

 Thus the lag-lead compensator becomes

 The compensated system will have the open loop transfer function
Parallel compensation

 In the parallel compensator design the controller(or compensator) is in a minor

loop, the design may seem to be more complicated than in the series
compensation case.
 It is, however, not complicated if we rewrite the characteristic equation to be of
the same form as the characteristic equation for the series compensated
systems.
 The closed loop transfer function for the system with parallel compensation is

 The characteristic equation is

 Cont’d
 By dividing this characteristic equation by the sum of the terms that do not
involve Gc, we obtain.

 If we define

 Then, the characteristic equation becomes

 So it becomes the same as the series compensator type. Hence the same design
approach could be used.
Reading assignment

 Root locus plots of positive feedback systems

Next lecture

 Frequency response method